Rifle Scopes LRTS/LRHS vs XTRIII

[stello1001]

Guys,

Is this even a question? At this point, I have a collection of LRTS/LRHS scopes and really like them for what they are. All but one are illuminated models.

Being that the XTRIII USA made are non illum, it's got me thinking whether it would make for a good upgrade. I do prefer illuminated reticles because I hunt with most of my rifles and nighttime hog hunting calls for it. However, this rifle does not get that kind of use.

Would going from the LRTS to the XTRIII be a big upgrade? Is the glass substantially better?
Looking forward to hear yalls thoughts!

 

[Hickswr]

There isn’t a con going from a LRHS to a XTRIII other than size/weight.

The Burris has superior glass and eyebox but what I appreciate the most between the two is the amazing the FOV the Burris has.

 

[NewsShooter]

You can get the XTRII illuminated as well.

 

[SonoranPrecision]

I have an LRTSi 3-12x44, and just picked up an XTR3 3.3-18 non-illuminated.

I can say that the fov on the LRTS is not that far behind the XTR3, however the XTR3 looks way bigger because it gives you a larger image (you see less of the scope body, so the image feels closer/larger).

The reticle in the LRTS is noticeably thicker than the XTR3. Though that is mostly personal preference.

The glass on the XTR3 is better that the LRTS, but not by a huge margin, and is hard to tell at 12x. But compared to my DMR2, with both at 18x, the XTR3 is a definite step up. Everything is sharper, especially past 6-800 yards.

All that said, the XTR3 is currently back at Burris with a reticle that shifts when adjusting magnification. I’m sure it’s a fluke, but it’s worth noting.

 

[stello1001]

I have an LRTSi 3-12x44, and just picked up an XTR3 3.3-18 non-illuminated.

I can say that the fov on the LRTS is not that far behind the XTR3, however the XTR3 looks way bigger because it gives you a larger image (you see less of the scope body, so the image feels closer/larger).

The reticle in the LRTS is noticeably thicker than the XTR3. Though that is mostly personal preference.

The glass on the XTR3 is better that the LRTS, but not by a huge margin, and is hard to tell at 12x. But compared to my DMR2, with both at 18x, the XTR3 is a definite step up. Everything is sharper, especially past 6-800 yards.

All that said, the XTR3 is currently back at Burris with a reticle that shifts when adjusting magnification. I’m sure it’s a fluke, but it’s worth noting.

From what I'm getting here, the XTRIII is superior but perhaps not enough for me to make the purchase. The LRTS I was maybe thinking about replacing is the 3-12 model and as you say, @ 12x it's hard to tell a difference.

I appreciate your response.

 

[SonoranPrecision]

From what I'm getting here, the XTRIII is superior but perhaps not enough for me to make the purchase. The LRTS I was maybe thinking about replacing is the 3-12 model and as you say, @ 12x it's hard to tell a difference.

I appreciate your response.

I’m still replacing the 3-12 with the XTR3 once I get it back and test it, but I will also frequently use the higher magnification. IMO the lrts is just an exceptional performer at the price point if you’re ok the 12x.

Honestly, after looking through the XTR3, then immediately through the LRTS, the bushnell felt a little straw-like. It’s drastic enough that I would consider swapping for that alone. That said, I would not get the XTR3 if it meant I had to sell the LRTS.

 

[diggler1833]

I own a Bushnell LRTS 4.5-18, a Bushnell DMR II, and a Burris XTR III 5.5-30.

The LRTS is a bit behind on glass, but it is so subjective and I'm not an optics reviewer. I've had all three together before trying to see the difference. If I gave the XTR III an arbitrary "90" on overall 'glass quality', the LRTS would be an 85. There isn't a ton of difference in either broad daylight or even lower light conditions. I've had zero tracking issues with any of them.

To the aficionados, it is probably worth the upgrade.

 

[Baron85]

I have a lrhsi, and lrtsi both 4-18 as well as a 3-18 xtr3, 5-30 xtr3 and xtr pro.

I really like the lrhs with the donut. Wish I could find a 3-12 version to pick up!

The xtr3’s are noticeably better glass in my eyes. They seem brighter, easier eye box, cut mirage, and resolve details like bullet holes better. The bushnell are no slouch but the Burris is better to me. I don’t think I would want an xtr3 on a hunting gun it’s heavier and the reticle is really fine.

 

[st1650]

I was going to go with a 4.5-18 LHRS but decided to go with an Ares ETR 3-18x50 for my spare hunting rifle this fall. It’s probably the first time I’ve ever decided to pick chinesium glass over Japan/LOW.

I liked the reticle and the FOV better than the Bushnell, also easier to get behind.

 

[Dobermann]

FWIW ... there's been some pretty solid reliability testing (including drop testing) posted about the LRTS/LRHS models. Not sure I've seen that for the Burris yet.

 

[Birddog6424]

I dont know when drop testing suddenly became a thing. But the fact that they've been out for nearly 4 years now and hearing of people "breaking" them is awfully rare, I would think it's safe to check the reliability box.

 

[stello1001]

I dont know when drop testing suddenly became a thing. But the fact that they've been out for nearly 4 years now and hearing of people "breaking" them is awfully rare, I would think it's safe to check the reliability box.

Didn't they just come out like yesterday?

 

[Birddog6424]

Didn't they just come out like yesterday?

I got my first XTRIII around April of 2019

 

[Dough300]

IRC the LRHS has a capped windage turret, and I discounted it from consideration due to that factor alone. I have several other high end Bushnell tactical scopes and they have been pretty decent, except I did have one crap out and cause me to wound an animal and send it back in for repair.

I have an XTR II 5-25 I got instead, and it is my favorite scope.

 

[Baron85]

Lrhs has capped windage, lrts has locking windage. Both of my examples function and track like they are on rails. And my Burris do the same as well, just with better glass and eye box.

My first “nice” scope was a bushnell ERS. I still have it and it still performs great but the tunneling effect snd glass quality leave some to desire. I do want to check out the new bushnell’s but I checked out a ln xtr pro at a match and it won me over.